HB 119 
.C6 W5 
Copy 1 



IMITIITTI 



■ 



Dr. Thomas Cooper, 
Economist 




by 
Elbert Vaughan Wills, M. A 






National Printing Company 

Portsmouth, Va, 

1917 



Dr. Thomas Cooper, 
Economist 




by 
Elbert Vaughan Wills, M, A, 



National Printing Company 

Portsmouth, Va. 

1917 






Copyright, 1917 

by 

E. V. Wills. 






1-t^ ( 



DR. THOMAS COOPER. 
ECONOMIST 



An interesting form of historico-economic investigation would 
be furnished by an endeavor to determine the extent to which the 
policies of statesmen have been influenced or determined by eco- 
nomic doctrines clearly or vaguely conceived. Such an inquiry 
would trace, in the field of national policy, the outcome of the 
speculations of a Smith, a Say, a Malthus, a Ricardo, or a Mill, 
and would lead to an interpretation of the course of history in 
terms of theoretical economics. In its application to the history of 
the United States, it would reveal or disprove the applicability of 
Professor Dunbar's stricture, expressed in his review of America's 
progress in economic science during the first century of independ- 
ence, when he asserted that questions of the greatest importance in 
the economic realm were habitually decided by subordinating con- 
siderations of a scientific nature to those of a political character.* 

There can be little question that the influence of certain great 
economic classics has been profound. The immortal work of Adam 
Smith, the "Wealth of Nations," affords perhaps the leading ex- 
ample. Pitt studied the "Wealth of Nations" so thoroughly that 
Smith declared that the statesman understood his work as well as 
himself. A modern historian of economic theory has said : "The 
book has exercised an influence in practical affairs which might 
have filled Adam Smith with astonishment. He remarked that to 
'expect' 'that the freedom of trade' — for which he so earnestly 
contended — 'should ever be entirely restored in Great Britain,' was 
'as absurd as to expect that an Oceana or Utopia should ever be 
established in it.' And yet. largely through the influence, direct 
or indirect, of his teaching, that 'freedom of trade' has been 'entire- 
ly restored'."^ Walter Bagehot has said of the "Wealth of Na- 
tions": "The life of almost every one in England — perhaps of 
every one — is different and better in consequence of it." "No 
other form of political philosophy has ever had one thousandth 
part of the influence on us; its teachings have settled down into 
the common sense of the nation, and have become irreversible."^ 

1 Dunbar, Charles F., "North American Review," Jan., 1876, pp. 145-146. 



- Price, L. L., "Political Economy in England," pp. 2-3. 



8 "Economic Studies, p. 1. 



Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 



Without entering into an extended inquiry of the nature that 
has been suggested, it may be interesting and profitable to examine 
the work of a pioneer in the formulation, teaching, and applica- 
tion of economic theory in the South, Dr. Thomas Cooper, scient- 
ist, educator, lawyer, and a storm centre in early American politics. 

Courses in political economy were introduced into several of 
the leading Southern colleges and universities at an early date. In 
most instances such courses were in charge of instructors of ability 
in this field, and their teaching went far toward refuting the nation- 

J wide applicability of the allegation made by President James when 
he attributes the absolutism of the early American disciples of the 
classical economists to the fact that courses in this science in 
American colleges were usually entrusted to professors who were 
trained as clergymen, and consequently ill qualified to deal, in a 
scientific spirit, with subjects of economic inquiry.* George Tucker, 
i for example, was appointed, in 1825, to the chair of Moral Phil- 
osophy and Political Economy in the University of Virginia, at 
that time just opening its doors. He filled this position for twenty 
years. Tucker's publications on economic science include "Prin- 

/ ciples of Rent, Wages, &c," "Theory of Money and Banks," 
"Banks or No Banks," and "Political Economy." 

Nor was the interest in political economy in the ante-bellum 
South confined to academic circles. Isaac N. Cardozo, a journalist 
and editor of Charleston, published in that city, in 1826, his "Notes 
on Political Economy." This was occasioned by his opposition to 
the doctrines promulgated in Professor McVickar's edition of Mc- 
Culloch's "Political Economy," and pointed out in detail the fun- 
damentally erroneous nature of the classical economic theory when 
applied to conditions in a new country, such as the United States. 
The Ricardian theory of rent was his special point of attack. 

These instances point to the conclusion that acquaintance with, 
and interest in, even that more abstract phases of economic inquiry 
were not lacking in the South during the early part of the nine- 
teenth century. They also indicate an independence of thought 
and an emphasis upon the influence of American conditions which 
suggests the position of the group known as "National Economists," 
without the advocacy of protection, however, which is character- 
istic of such nationalists as List and Carey. We shall find occa- 
sion to deal with this analogy in greater detail in the following 
pages. 

Early economic speculation in the South, however, found its 
most complete and systematic statement in the work of Dr. 
Thomas Cooper. 



"7 



* James, E. J., Introduction to Ingram's "History of Political Economy." 



Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 



The career of Dr. Cooper affords an example of a versatility 
of genius which is astonishing in this age of intense specialization. 
Born in London on October 22, 1759, he is said to have been edu- 
cated at Oxford, although his name does not appear upon the offi- 
cial list of graduates. At the conclusion of his course in the lib- 
eral arts, he studied law and was admitted to the bar. Although 
devoting thorough study to the classical curriculum of the univer- 
sity, Cooper early manifested a decided bent toward the natural 
sciences, and while a student of law he also acquired a thorough 
knowledge of anatomy and medicine. 

Cooper entered actively into the political agitations of the 
period of the French Revolution, and, in company with James 
+ Watt,* the inventor of the steam engine, he was sent by the English 
democratic clubs to the affiliated organizations in France. In re- 
ply to Edmund Burke's criticism of his course in this particular, he 
published a violent pamphlet, the reissue of which in popular form 
was forbidden by the attorney general. v 

In the midst of his participation in political and social agita- 
tion, Cooper did not lose his interest in the natural sciences. Pre- 
vious to this time, the cloth manufacturers of the British Isles had 
been dependent almost entirely upon Continental countries, partic- 
ularly upon Holland, for the beaching of their product. The prim- 
itive process of bleaching was a long and expensive one, more than 
half a year being consumed in the operation. Improved processes 
of bleaching through the use of chlorine were introduced following 
the discovery of that element by Scheele in 1774. These improve- 
ments not only tended to cheapen and shorten the bleaching pra- 
cess, but obviated the necessity of shipment to the Continent. 
While in France, Cooper learned the process of making chlorine 
from common salt. After his return to England, he established 
himself as a bleacher and calico printer in Manchester. In this he 
was unsuccessful. Together with his friend. Dr. Joseph Priest- 
ley, he then decided to emigrate to America. He settled first in 
Sunbury, Pa., and took up the practice of law. The period was 
one of violent political controversy, and Cooper's impetuous spirit 
led him to plunge vehemently into these disputes. In the columns 
of the Reading "Weekly Advertiser" for October 26, 1799, he 
directed a violent attack against President John Adams. Under 
the famous Sedition law of 1798, which provided for the punish- 
ment of any person maliciously slandering the government or any 
of its officers. Cooper was brought to trial in 1800. He was sen- 
tenced to imprisonment for a term of six months, and to pay a 
fine of $400.^ With the triumph of the Anti-Federalists, however. 



6 Wharton, "State Trials of the United States," pp. 659-681. 
Rutt, "Life of Priestley," II, 6,1. 



Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 



his fortunes improved, and he became judge of one of the common 
pleas districts of Pennsylvania. 

Dr. Cooper's career as an educator began with his appoint- 
ment to the chair of chemistry in Dickinson College, Carlisle, Penn- 
sylvania. In 1816 he became professor of mineralogy, and chem- 
istry at the University of Pennsylvania. 

The range and character of Dr. Cooper's attainments had al- 
ready attracted the attention of Thomas Jefferson who was en- 
gaged at that time in the great project which occupied the final 
period of his life, the establishment of the University of Virginia. 
Not only Dr. Cooper' reputation as a scientist, but the fact that he 
possessed a scientific library and a collection of scientific apparatus 
and mineral specimens probably unsurpassed among private col- 
lections in America at that time, rendered Jefferson even more de- 
sirous of securing his services as a member of the faculty of the 
new institution. Accordingly, on the day following the laying of 
the cornerstone of Central College, the institution from which the 
University of Virginia was developed. Dr. Cooper was elected to 
the professorship of chemistry and of law. At the first meeting 
of the board of visitors of the University of Virginia, held on 
March 29, 1819, it was resolved that "Dr. Thomas Cooper of 
Philadelphia, heretofore appointed professor of chemistry and of 
law for the Central College, be confirmed and appointed for the 
university as professor of chemistry, mineralogy, and natural phil- 
osophy, and as professor of law also."® 

The delay in the erection of suitable buildings, and uncer- 
tainty in regard to funds prevented the opening of the University 
of Virginia until the spring of 1825. Opposition to Dr. Cooper's 
unitarian views also developed among the Virginia clergy, and, al- 
though strongly resented by Jefferson, led on the professor's part 
to an uneasiness "not only for himself, but lest this persecution 
should become embarrassing to the visitors, and injurious to the 
institution.' These considerations induced him, in 1819, to accept 
the professorship of chemistry in South Carolina College. In the 
following year he became president of the institution, a position 
which he held until 1834. The last years of his life were devoted 
to the work of revising the statutes of South Carolina. He died 
on May 11, 1840. 

In connection with the introduction of the study of political 
economy into South Carolina College, Dr. Cooper prepared a work 
entitled "Lectures on the Elements of Political Economy," which 
was published at Columbia in 1826, and which it is our purpose to 
examine with a view to determining the extent to which the author 

« "The Writings of Thomas Jefferson," Vol. XIX, pp. 377-378. 
'f Jefferson, Letter to General Taylor, May 16. 1820. 



Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 



was influenced for the formulators of the classical economic doc- 
trines, and the degree to which there is reason to believe that eco- 
nomic conditions in the Southern States at that period operated to 
modify his views. 

In the preface to his work. Dr. Cooper recounts the circum- 
stances leading to the preparation of an elementary treatise on po- 
litical economy, and at the same time voices his conviction of the 
fundamental importance of the study as a part of the college cur- 
riculum : 

"At the Commencement held in the South Carolina College 
for 1824. I delivered an address recommending the study of Polit- 
ical Economy, and the regular appointment of a Professor for the 
purpose. The culpable inattention in our country to a science of 
such extensive application, and the manifest ignorance or neglect 
of its first principles, among our Statesmen and Legislatures, 
seemed to me imperiously to call for some measures which should 
force into public notice a branch of knowledge, on which human 
happiness so much depended. The Trustees of the College were 
of opinion with me : and requested I should draw up and deliver 
a course of Lectures on Political Economy to the Senior Class of 
the Students of the College. On being freed from the Professor- 
ship of Rhetoric. Criticism and Belles Lettres. which has now de- 
volved on my friend Mr. Nott: I delivered in conformity to the 
request of the Trustees, the following course of Lectures, in addi- 
tion to my Professorship of Chemistry. I hope with good effect. 
For we teach our youth in vain, unless we enable them to keep 
pace with the improvements of the day." 

The strongest argument for the inclusion of political economy 
as one of the studies of the college curriculum. Dr. Cooper finds 
in the importance of an acquaintance with its principles as a pre- 
paration for intelligent participation in the political life of State 
and nation, activities in which young men possessing the advantage 
of college training would naturally assume positions of leadership. 
Without such preparation for public life, the graduate would "be 
but ill prepared for the duties, which some years hence he may be 
called upon to undertake."^ 

The controversy between the adherents of the deductive and 
those of the Inductive method In the consideration of economic 
phenomena, has constituted perhaps • the most striking feature of 
the course of speculation In this field since the time of Adam 
Smith, and has probably furnished the most Important Incentive 
to a broadening of the field of the science. While Adam Smith 
makes extensive and important use of induction, the characteristic 
method of the English classical economists was one of abstract 
and detached analysis employing the deductive method almost ex- 

8 "Lectures on the Elements of Politcial Economy," preface. 



8 Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 



clnsively. For these thinkers, political economy was wholly a 
normative science, as distinguished from the composite of norma- 
tive and positive elements constituting the science as construed by 
its modern adherents. For the former, political economy posits a 
standard of industrial freedom and traces necessary connections 
among the phenomena of wealth. For the latter, the positive side 
of the science asserts itself in the direct application of economic 
doctrines in the guidance of statesmen, men of affairs, or social 
reformers. The method of the classicists is designated by Mill as 
the Physical or Concrete Deductive, reasoning from known causes 
to their consequences and subjecting the results to the test of com- 
parison with the facts of experience. 

Dr. Cooper's method, while not neglecting induction entirely, 
was primarily deductive. "Political Economy therefore," he says, 
"which analyses the transactions and dealings which take place be- 
tween men who are combined in a political community, is not a 
science of conjecture, but of facts and consequences : as dependent 
the one upon the other, as the falling of a stone to the earth, on 
the principle of gravitation. Doubts and mistakes have arisen and 
may arise, when the antecedent circumstances are partially, and im- 
perfectly observed, and when conclusions are deduced from incom- 
plete premises. This happens in every science. But the minute 
and careful investigation which the several parts of this extensive 
subject have received within the last twenty years, has shown us, 
that ba degrees we may attain to certainty in proportion as we aim 
at accuracy; and that much of that knowledge which was formerly 
dubious, may now be stated in the form of elemtnary truths, settled 
and incontrovertible."^ 

It is necessary, in any analysis or evaluation of the work of 
the early economists, to consider the fragmentary and ill-defined 
state of the science prior to the publication of the "Wealth of 
Nations." Economic inquiry, it is true, is very ancient in its 
origin. Indeed, well marked traces may be discerned by the stu- 
dent of the culture-history of the Oriental theocracies. Among 
the Greeks, we find a modicum of economic thought, permeated at 
first with mythological relations, but becoming clearer as time goes 
on in consequence of the rise of abstract speculation with Thales 
of Miletus. Greek thought on economic subjects is characterized 
by emphasis upon the importance of the State, to which the indi- 
viduality of the citizen was subordinated. On the theoretical side, 
the emphasis, as might be expected from the nature of the indus- 
trial organization among the Greeks, was upon the consumption 
of wealth rather than upon its production; and upon consumption 
for the specific aim, not of personal enjoyment, but for higher 
moral and public ends. There was, moeover, a noteworthy ten- 

* "liectures," p. 26. 



Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 9 

dency toward Utopianism in the formulation of ideal systems of 
political and social organization, the most important of these be- 
ing the "Republic" of Plato. 

The Romans, with their practical cast of mind, little adapted 
to speculative activity, and concerned, moreover, with struggles 
within the State for the establishment of the constitution and the 
rights of the orders, and externally for world conquest, added lit- 
tle to the economic thought of the Greeks. Fragments of varying 
value occur in the works of the philosophers and jurists, and the 
subject is dealt with in somewhat greater detail in the works of 
such writers de re rustica as Cato and Varro. On the whole, how- 
ever, a modicum of well defined results attended ancient specula- 
tion in the economic sphere. 

The Middle Ages represent a period of chaos followed by the 
gradual restoration of a semblance of order in political, economic, 
and social affairs. Great movements which later shaped themselves 
were then in their nebulous inception. The foundations of the 
economic order which was later to develop were then being laid, 
but neither the spirit nor the conditions of the times favored, or 
even, indeed, permitted, attention to the elaboration of economic 
systems. 

With the opening of the modern period, economic doctrines 
began to be more consistently developed and to function appre- 
ciably in the determination of the policies of governments. The 
early period, extending approximately from the end of the thir- 
teenth to the end of the fifteenth century, was productive of little 
development in theory save with reference to the function of 
money. The second period, beginning with the sixteenth century, 
was marked in the realm of politics by the growth of strongly ^ 
centralized monarchies. For the maintenance of these govern- 
ments, and particularly for the prosecution of the wars which they 
waged, the mediaeval exchequer was utterly inadequate. Ques- 
tions of public finance, therefore, became of paramount importance. 
The contempt for industries other than agricultural and those con- 
nected directly with military affairs, which had characterized the 
feudal baron, gave place to an active encouragement of the indus- ^^" 
tries of the towns. The activities of government in economic 
affairs came, in some instances, to eclipse other phases of govern- 
mental policy. 

The fundamental principle of the governmental oversight thus ^ 
exercised was the doctrine of mercantilism, which distinguishes the 
rather embryonic economic reasoning of the seventeenth century. 
As Roscher has pointed out. mercantilism was not a theoretic sys- », 
tem so much as a group of tendencies, scarcely rising to the plane 
of tenets. Of these, the one most frequently associated with mer- 
cantilism was a tendency toward the exaggeration of the import- 



10 Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 

ance to a nation of the possession of a large store of gold and 
silver. According to the mercantilists, therefore, the guiding aim 
of economic policy on the part of a nation was the maintenance in 
international commerce of a favorable balance of trade, selling the 
greatest possible amount of its own products, and importing as 
little as possible of the products of other countries, thus receiving 
the balance, or difference between exports and imports in gold or 
silver. As contributing to the desired result, the predominant im- 
portance of foreign, as compared with domestic, trade was em- 
phasized, and governmental intervention in directing industry into 
those channels which were considered to be conducive to the end 
sought was advocated. 

By the opening of the eighteenth century, the mistaken appli- 
cation of mercantilistic policies, often in the service of political 
interests, had produced in France a deplorable state of oppressive 
taxation, and a consequent reduction of the agricultural population 
to an impoverished condition. 

With the Enlightenment in philosophy, arose new lines of 
development in economic theory. These doctrines found their 
home chiefly in France, where they fostered a reaction against the 
extreme mercantilism of Colbert. Accordingly the Physiocratic 
school arose under such leaders as Quesnay and Gournay. 

The essential characteristic of the Physiocratic system was a 
belief in an ordre natnreUc, of divine institution and perfect ar- 
rangement, which was the ideal to which the ordre positive, or laws 
of human institution should strive to approximate. Thus the 
Physiocrats were upholders of what Knies calls absolutism of 
theory, maintaining the essentially unchangeable and universal na- 
ture of economic laws. 

Coupled with this emphasis upon naturallaw was a passion 
for individual freedom, probably due in large measure to the influ- 
ence upon Phyisocratic theorists of the philosophy of Locke. They 
held that the individual constitutes the most competent judge of 
his own interest, his unrestricted action being more nearly in ac- 
cordance with the ordre natnrcllc than if hampered by the inter- 
ference of governmental authority. This view was expressed in 
the oft-repeated maxim, hisses faire, implying a policy of govern- 
mental non-interference diametrically opposed to the principles of 
mercantilism. The "capital error" of the Physiocrats was, how- 
ever, as Smith points out, in regarding agriculture "as the sole 
source of the revenue and wealth of every country." 

It was in the work of the Scotchman, Adam Smith, however, 
that the system of natural liberty found its classic exponent, and 
political economy as aTdeveloped science its origin. In the "Wealth 
of Nations," Smith gathered the essential elements of the thought 
of his predecessors, and combined them with his own theories into 



Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 11 

a co-ordinated system which was supreme in the field until the rise 
of the German Historical school, and has exerted in the world of 
affairs the tremendous influence which has been touched upon al- 
ready. 

Perhaps the most debated point among those economists who 
preceded Smith concerned the source of wealth. The Physiocrats 
found this source in land. They maintained that only agriculture, 
including such extractive industries as mining and fishing, could 
add to the wealth of a nation. The Mercantilists held that the 
wealth of a nation could be increased only by an increase in its 
store of the precious metals; and that, to this end, foreign trade 
should be encouraged above other forms of industry, as tending, 
through a favorable balance of trade, to add to the national store 
of bullion. Even among the early Mercantilists, however, there 
was a distinct recognition of the importance of labor in the pro- 
duction of wealth. Sir William Petty declared that "Labour is the 
father and active principle of Wealth, as Lands are the mother." 
Adam Smith, with characteristic acuteness, perceived clearly the •- 
fundamental importance of labor and the division of labor. The 
"Wealth of Nations" begins with the declaration that "The annual ^ 
labour of every nation is the fund which originally supplies it with 
all the necessaries and conveniences of life." 

Dr. Cooper follows Adam Smith in emphasizing the import- k 
ance of labor in the creation of value, and likewise in making labor 
both the cause and the measure of value. While the general rule 
is laid down that price represents an exchange of labor against 
labor, and that "a day's labour in one useful fonn, shall command a 
day's labour in any other form," ^° it is recognized that conditions 
may arise in which demand and supply may operate to force prices 
upward or downward in particular lines. The example afforded 
by the depression in English industry following the termination of 
the contest against Napoleon was fresh in Dr. Cooper's mind, and 
he emphasized, therefore, the precarious situation of a country in v 
which a single form of industry is relied upon by the population 
to the exclusion of others. 

In his criticism of Mercantilism, the system of the Physio- 
crats, and the "Wealth of Nations," Dr. Cooper gives evidence of 
a broader view on the subject of productive labor than had charac- 
terized his predecessors. Quesnay is criticised in the following 
terms : 

"This system of Dr. Quesnay got rid at once of all the evils 
of the mercantile and manufacturing system. It was defective, 
chiefly in ranking the merchant and the manufacturers among the 
non producers, seeing that they assuredly add new value by their 
operations to the Commodity they are employed about; in which 

10 "Lectures," p. 88. 



12 Dr. Thomas Cooper, E conomist 

also they are as much assisted by the natural agents, wind, water,, 
magnetism, heat, steam, &c., as the agriculturist is; so that if they 
do not produce a new raw material, they do more, they add a new 
value to that which had none before, and convert an useless sub- 
stance into an useful one. Moreover, if the Merchant and Manufac- 
turer are as well paid for their labour, skill, and capital as the agri- 
culturist, as the case really is, a land tax as a substitute for every 
other, would be a very unequal and unjust impost. Nor were the 
Economists less mistaken in taking for granted that all wealth con- 
sisted in material substances: wealth consists in the value given to 
— the utility conferred upon material substances by human skill and 
labor; a mahogany tree in the woods of the bay of Campeachy 
has no value : it must undergo the operations of the man who cuts 
it down, of the merchant who transports it, and of the cabinet 
maker who converts it into furniture, before it can become useful, 
and possess exchangeable value." " 

The same views appear in the criticism of Adam Smith. In 
enumerating the points in which Smith was mistaken, the first is: 

"That agriculture is the most beneficial of all employments. 
^ We now know that whatever employment is most beneficial to the 
individual, is most beneficial to the community. If the merchant 
or manufacturer is as well paid for his labor, skill, and capital as 
the agriculturist, he is as usefully employed. A nation or com- 
munity consists essentially of the individuals who compose it." ^^ 

Having rejected the Physiocratic definition of wealth as the 
useful product of the soil, on the ground that it would exclude all 
manufacturing and commercial pursuits, and Smith's conception 
of wealth as the result of land and labor on the ground that it 
"does not tell us what wealth is," Dr. Cooper comes to consider 
Lord Lauderdale's definition of wealth as everything useful and 
delightful to man. This he rejects as too vague. "A mere com- 
pliment, if v\^ell timed, may be both the one and the other: it may 
serve our interest and gratify our vanity: but surely the term 
wealth, thus applied, would be misapplied." " This leads up to 
. Dr. Cooper's own definition of wealth as "those material objects 
on which value has been conferred by human skill and labour — 
which are desired for the gratification of human wants — and which 
cannot be attained by those who seek them, but by giving some 
other object in return equally desirable to him who receives it." " 

1^ '^Lectures," p. 8. 

12 "Lectures," p. 10. 

13 Ibid., p. 62. 

" "Lectures," p. 27. 



Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 13 

This leads to a consideration of the subject of value, which 
is defined in the folowing terms: "Value consists in the utility- 
conferred on any material object by which it is rendered capable 
of contributing to human necessity, comfort or enjoyment." ^^ 

Throughout the history of economic speculation, the theory of 
value has been regarded as one of fundamental importance. In 
his "Principles of Political Economy," John Stuart Mill declared 
that "The smallest error on that subject infects with correspond- 
ing error all our other conclusions; and anything vague or misty 
in our conception of it creates confusion and uncertainty in every- 
thing else." 

In the study of the views of the early economists concerning 
value, it is necessary to take account of the fact that perhaps no 
branch of economic speculation has undergone a more complete 
transformation during the past half century. Adam Smith dis- 
tinguished between value in use and value in exchange, defining 
the latter as the "power of purchasing other goods" possessed by 
a commodity. He dealt, in detail, however, with exchange value 
alone. His discussion regarding even value in use is objective. 
In this particular Dr. Cooper's thought marks a distinct advance 
over that of Smith in giving greater weight to the subjective fac- 
tor in determining utility. Many of the theories which determine 
the course of thought on the subject of value are of recent origin, 
hence a greater exactness characterizes recent discussions. Value 
in use, as conceived by Dr. Cooper and his immediate predecessors, 
was sometimes identical with utility; oftener, perhaps, with sub- 
jective, as opposed to objective, value. The conception of final 
utility, or marginal utility, as developed by Jevons and Marshall, 
was not thought out by the pioneers. The differentiation of various 
kinds of value, — elementary value, form value, place value, time 
value — which characterizes modern theorizing on this subject, had 
not then appeared. 

Dr. Cooper reviews two theories of exchangeable value which 
had been proposed by his predecessors; on the one hand that of 
Smith and Malthus, making value vary with the supply of capital 
and the general condition of demand and supply; on the other, 
that of Ricardo "which considers the labour accumulated on any 
commodity, as the measure of its exchangeable value: and con- 
siders that as a standard of value, which invariably requires the 
same quantity of labour to produce it." " 

Dr. Cooper differs from Ricardo in that he does not regard 
original labor cost in production as an essential factor in determ- 
ining the price which a prospective purchaser may be willing to 

"Ibid., p. 63. 



18 "Lectures," p. 67. 



14 Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 

pay. His view leaves space for the operation of commercial re- 
strictions, monopolies, and speculation, "No purchaser cares a 
cent what the prime cost of an article is: that is not his look out. 
His only inquiry can be, is it worth to me the price asked for it? 

"It is true, that natural or necessary price must be obtained, 
or the market will not be permanently supplied. What then? If 
the buyers do not want the article at the price demanded, they will 
leave the market to its own hazard. 

"Hence it follows, that although the natural or necessary price 
— the amount of labour worked up in an article brought to market, 
is the permanent regulator of its market value, this value will fluc- 
tuate in all cases with the fluctuation of demand and supply. These 
fluctuate by means of commercial restrictions and prohibitions — 
by means of monopolies and exclusive privileges — by improvements 
in the mode of production — by speculation." " 

It is readily inferred that Dr. Cooper's thought at this point 
was influenced to a very important degree by the conditions of his 
environment during the period of his residence in the South. In 
an agricultural region, remote from important centres of manu- 
^ facture, the quantity of labor expended in the production of a 
commodity would naturally occupy a less important, and, under 
the operation of a protective tariff, the burdens imposed thereby, 
a more important place in determining price. The sole guide of 
•the buyer in such a case would be the question of utility. 

The ingredients of prime cost are enumerated by Dr. Cooper 
as rent in some cases, or price of raw material, labor, skill, and 
interest of capital. When the customary rate of profit on capital 
is added, we have the natural price, as termed by Ricardo, because 
it must be repaid unless the producer is to incur a loss. It is 
called necessary price by Malthus, because there will be no supply 
of the commodity on the market if it does not repay expenses of 
production and yield the usual rate of profit. 

Dr. Cooper's discussion on the subject of rent reveals the fact 
. that he was influenced by the thought of Adam Smith and the 
Physiocrats, rather than by that of Ricardo and the predecessors 
of the latter in the development of the so-called Ricardian theory. 
In contrast with the Ricardian view, which has become, with some 
modifications, the prevailing one, Smith and the Physiocrats main- 
tained that rent is due to the bounty of Nature, and regarded it as 
consisting of that part of the produce of the soil which remains 
after paying wages for the labor involved and profits for the cap- 
ital employed in production. Under the operation of the competi- 
tive system, they held that this return is necessarily received by 
the landlord. 



" "Lectures," p. 67. 



Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 15 

The Ricardian theory finds the source of rent in the parsim- 
ony rather than in the bounty of Nature. Rent consists of the 
surplus over the bare expenses of production, the return varying 
with differences in soils. As prices rise, poorer soils may be 
brought into cultivation. In this case there will be a proportionate 
increase in the rent paid by the cultivators of the superior soils. 
Before resorting to additional quantities of land, however, it is 
frequently profitable to spend additional amounts in the cultiva- 
tion of the old land. The former case involves an extensive mar- 
gin of cultivation; the latter an intensive margin, limited by the 
operation of the law of diminishing returns. In the latter case 
also a rent will arise, consisting of the excess over what would be 
produced by spending the same amount on the marginal soil. 

Dr. Cooper's restatement of Smith's view takes the following 
form : 

"If the tenant by cultivating the land, obtains reasonable pay 
for his labour and skill, and the usual profit of agriculture on the 

capita! he brings to bear upon it. he can expect no more 

When he receives these, he can afford to pay the land owner the 
surplus in the form of rent, for furnishing the means for making 
this average profit." ^* 

It is probable that the insignificant position of free tenancy 
in the industrial system of the South in Dr. Cooper's day accounts 
for the lack of a more detailed and original analysis of the phe- 
nomena of rent in his work. In his discussion of the relation of 
rent to price, he does not allow himself to fall into the confusion 
which led to inconsistancy on the part of Adam Smith. 

Of Adam Smith's discussion on the subject of wages it has 
been said : "In the 'Wealth of Nations' may be found traces of 
virtually every wage theory ever developed." ^^ The term "wages- 
fund" belongs to a later period, and was perhaps first employed 
by N. W. Senior. Nevertheless, such phrases as "funds destined 
for the payment of wages," and "funds destined for the main- 
tenance of labour," suggests the designation. "The demand for 
those who live by wages," Smith asserts, "it is evident, cannot 
increase but in proportion to the increase of the funds which are 
destined for the payment of wages." Of these funds Smith dis- 
tinguishes two kinds : "first, the revenue which is over and above 
what is necessary for the maintenance; and secondly, the stock 
which is over and above what is necessary for the employment of 
the masters." ^ Smith was an ardent disciple of the system of 
"natural liberty," believing that the beneficent order of the uni- 

18 "Lectures," p. 83. 



"Haney, "History of Economic Thought," p. 171. 



20 "Wealth of Nations," Book I, chapter 8. 



16 Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 

verse would lead each individual, if unrestricted, to promote the 
general welfare in promoting his own. A more pessimistic turn 
was given, however, by Malthus. In connection with his theory 
of population, the latter pointed out that, as a corollary of the law 
of diminishing returns in agriculture, and his law of the increase 
of population, the share of the wealth of a country obtained by 
the poorer classes tended to become less and less, and that wages, 
therefore, tended downward to the subsistence level. He main- 
4 tained that wages depend upon a fund of capital, and can only be 
increased by increase of the fund of capital or diminution in the 
number of laborers sharing in its distribution. 

From the theory of value put forward by Ricardo, namely, 
that the value of any commodity depends "on the relative quantity 
of labor" which was "necessary for its production," and his appli- 
cation of this theory to the value of labor, was derived the so- 
called "iron law" of wages, according to which the rate of wages 
tends to approximate the cost of production of labor, which is the 
cost of the laborer's subsistence. By ignoring the many and im- 
portant restrictions to its operation which Ricardo recognized, this 
view has been made the basis of the socialistic contention that 
value is due entirely to labor. 

Dr. Cooper's discussion of the subject of wages follows, in 
] the main, the thought of Smith as to a fund of capital destined 
for the payment of wages. Traces of the influence of Malthus 
and Ricardo are also apparent. "Labour can only be put in requi- 
sition by capital. If therefore there be not a regular annual addi- 
tion to the aggregate amount of accumulated capital, there can be 
no regular addition to the quantity of labour in a nation. If 
labourers are propagated and there is no demand for them, the 
market becomes over stocked; they are competitors for employ- 
ment; labour falls in price; poverty and the diseases attendant up- 
on it, appear; and the ranks are thinned till wages mount up by a 
lessened supply of working men, to the natural or necessary price 
of labour; to wit, adequate subsistence for a married couple and 
a child or two." '' 

Here again Dr. Cooper escaped a bias which impairs the value 
of Smith's view. In the section already quoted, the latter enumer- 
ates the sources from which may arise a demand for labor: "the 
revenue which is over and above what is necessary for the main- 
tenance; and secondly, the stock which is over and above what is 
necessary for the employment of the masters." From Smith's 
analysis of stock and capital in the second book, it appears that 
"revenue" refers to what is expended in the employment of domes- 
tic or personal servants or retainers. Such expenditure serves to 
employ "unproductive" laborers, and the expenditure represents 

21 "Lectures," p. 94. 



Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 17 

prodigality. "Stock," on the other hand, refers to that which is 
expended in the employment of productive labor. 

In Dr. Cooper's view, the term "productive" will admit of any 
one of several meanings : 

"1st. Labour and erpenditure may be productive without add- 
ing anything to the wealth of the individual; if it be employed in 
the gratification of reasonable wants. 

"2nd. Labour may be productively expended, and add greatly 
to individual and to national wealth, without being productive in 
the sense which Dr. A. Smith proposes. Thus, any expenditure of 
labour, or of any money or other exponent of labour, may be 
called productive, which affords more gratification and enjoyment 
than the price paid. But this may be transitory pleasure : or it may 
be imprudent as interfering with more imperious wants or duties. 
. . . . It will nevertheless be true, that wealth individual or 
national, consists in values artificially conferred on raw material : 
that the labour employed in producing this effect is productive 
labour : and the expenditure which puts on the form of capital, 
providing for the permanent existence of any quantity of this kind 
of labour which would not have been brought into employ with- 
out it, productive expenditure : and finally, there is a difference im- 
possible to be mistaken between maintaining ten menial domestics 
who might be dispensed with, and ten labourers employed in cul- 
tivating a farm which produces a profit of twenty per cent." '^ 

Perhaps the most important section of Dr. Cooper's work for 
the student of the political history of the period, is that which 
deals with the problem of slave labor, revealing, as it does, the v 
view of one in a position of the greatest importance in the shaping 
of intelligent opinion in the ante-bellum South. 

"Slave labour," we read, "is undoubtedly the dearest kind of 
labour: it is all forced: and forced too. from a class of human be- 
ings, who of all others, have the least propensity to voluntary 
labour, even when it is to benefit themselves alone. 

"What is the value of a negro at full age of twenty-one? 

"From birth to fifteen years of age, including food, cloath- / 
ing, life insurance, and medicine, he will be an expence. 

"From fifteen to twenty-one, his labour may be made to pay 
the cost of his insurance, attendance, maintenance, and cloathing. 

"The work he can do from birth to fifteen years of age, will 
scarcely compensate the insurance of his life, and the medicine and 
attendance he may need: this, twenty years ago was fifty, it will 
even now be on average thirty-three and a third per cent. 

"Including this hazard, a negro at twenty-one may be con- 
sidered as having cost forty dollars a year (thirty for food and 
cloathing, and ten for insurance) for fifteen years, or six hundred 

22 "Lectures," pp, 106-107, 



18 Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 

dollars : and I think all hazards included and all earnings deducted, 
the lowest cost of a negro of twenty-one, to the person who raises 
him, will, on an average, be five hundred dollars. 

"The usual work of a field hand, is barely two thirds what 
a white day labourer at usual wages would perform : this is the 
outside. The food, cloathing and medicine of a field hand, will be 
about forty dollars a year. 

"He may become sick; or lame; he may die or run away; he 
must be maintained in old age. Such property ought to bring at 
least ten per cent per annum interest on the capital laid out in his 
purchase, or in rearing him. Suppose five hundred dollars to be 
the capital thus expended in the purchase or rearing of a negro 
of twenty-one. Then his cost will be ninety dollars per annum 
for two-thirds of a day's work of a white man, or one hundred 
and twenty dollars per annum for negro labour of the same amount 
in quantity as a white man's. So that on this calculation they are 
both equal in cost. But an overseer is necessary to a negro, and 
not to a white labourer. Wages of white labourers in the north, 
are from six to eight dollars and board, per month. The boarding 
of a labourer in the family of a German farmer, in Pennsylvania 
or New York state, will be forty or perhaps fifty dollars a year, 
if he does not work with steady reasonable industry, he is dis- 
charged. 

"Nothing will justify slave labour in point of economy, but 
the nature of the soil and climate which incapacitates a white man 
from labouring in the summer time; as on the rich lands in Caro- 
lina and Georgia, extending one hundred miles from the sea board. 
In places merely agricultural, as New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, 
Indiana, Missouri, slave labour is entirely unprofitable. It is so 
even in Maryland and Virginia. 

"In South Carolina or Georgia. I doubt if the rich lands 
could (be) cultivated without slave labour." ^^ 

With regard to the relative importance of manufactures and 
agriculture, and the extent to which the development of the one 
should be encouraged at the expense of the other. Dr. Cooper takes 
the traditional laisse^j-faire position. The members of a commu- 
nity are best able to dispose of their labor, capital, and skill to the 
best advantage for their own interest. Hence "the prayer of the 
citizens to their legislature, is that of the merchants to Colbert; 
'let us alone'." '* 

The more stable and permanent character of agricultural im- 
provements, however, is contrasted with the danger of loss in 
manufacturing industries, and the more healthful and invigorating 

23 "Lectures," pp, 94-96. 

24 Id., p. 117. ' , 



Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 19 

nature of agricultural pursuits is emphasized. It is pointed out, 
moreover, that manufactures and commerce are fruitful sources of 
international quarrels. "I have no objection to a war of territorial 
defence, pro Aris et Focis: but no branch of commerce, no manu- 
facture is w^orth a war." Hence Dr. Cooper takes rank as an un- ^ 
qualified advocate of free trade. "How decidedly," we read, 
"would a system of free ports, eradicate the most fruitful sources 
of war? Nothing renders a custom house necessary, but the un- 
willingness of people; who are afraid of paying the necessary taxes 
in the cheapest and most eligible form." "^ 

The section devoted to the discussion of international trade is 
characteristic in its emphatic statement, and reveals the theoretical 
basis of Dr. Cooper's opposition to the policy of protection. 
Jealousy of rival commerce, and the endeavor to weaken commer- 
cial rivals are condemned. "I wish I could say," he observes, ^ 
"that this narrow minded jealousy, this selfish determination to 
let no nation profit by our intercourse, was not at the bottom of 
the late tariff. But i* was. It belongs inherently and essentially 
to the maufacturing system; manufacturers being by inclination 
and by interest, here and everywhere, monopolists." ^^ 

The undemocratic nature of tariff laws, and of governmental ^ 
encouragement in general is pointed out. "What right," we read, 
"can a government have to tax me in order that my son or my 
grand-son may carry on a trade profitably half a century hence, 
which is a losing trade now, and must be for many years to come ? 
How can the community be benefitted by paying a manufacturer a 
bounty at my expense, taken out of my pocket, not for my benefit 
but for his?"'^ And in refutation of the argument that the gen- 
eral welfare is thus promoted, Dr. Cooper says: "Where will you 
limit the all-devouring pretence of the general welfare? .... 
I suppose it was for the general welfare that Caligula appointed 
his horse to the consulship." "® 

The emphasis upon the doctrine of natural liberty common to 
the school of Smith finds expression in the substitute advanced for ^ 
the protective system. The actual want of a commodity will, it is 
argued, give rise to profit attending its production, and this, with- 
out the instrumentality of governmental agencies, will bring about 
such production. If not profitable, demand has not arisen sufficient 
to justify production. 



25 "Lectures," p. 120. 

26"L.ectures," p. 179 (Incorrerctly printed 279). 

27 Ibid., p. 186. 

28 Ibid., p. 186. 



20 Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 

These points indicate Dr. Cooper's emphatic advocacy of the 
laissez-faire position. Additional evidence may be adduced from 
his denunciation of legislation under the guise of the general wel- 
fare. In this manner, he considers, many flagrant acts of injustice 
have been done against agriculturists. North and South. Here, 
again. Dr. Cooper's views furnish an insight into the Southern 
point of view on the issues that led to the Civil War. The possi- 
bility of an act for the emancipation of the slaves, coming under 
this guise, presented itself. While it has been shown that Dr. 
Cooper was keenly alive to the evils of the slavery system, he had 
only condemnation for any unwarranted interference with the 
affairs of individuals on the part of the central government. 

Dr. Cooper's discussion of the subject of taxation also mani- 
fests his laisses-faire traits. The influence of Adam Smith is ap- 
parent. "When a man is deprived of a part of his property with- 
out an equivalent in return, he is the poorer for it." '* 

"Hence I conclude that all taxation encreases the number of 
unproductive consumers, and the amount of unproductive consump- 
tion; and tends, not to enrich, but to impoverish a nation. Hence 
as taxes are an evil, the fewer we have of them and the smaller in 
amount, the better. That government is best and those political 
institutions are most eligible, that are efficient at the cheapest 
rate." ^^ It is predicted that the advance in the diffusion of knowl- 
edge of economic principles will bring governments within half a 
century to abandon customs duties and to resort to direct taxation. 

In his views on the doctrine of population, Dr. Cooper was 
a follower of Malthus. It is affirmed that the tendency of popula- 
tion is to increase at a more rapid rate than the production of food. 
"To all agricultural improvement, there must be a term where it 
ends — a maximum." This is Dr. Cooper's nearest approach to a 
statement of the law of diminishing returns. It is recognized, on 
the other, hand, that increasing population gives rise to habits of 
thrift. 

Taking up the argument advanced in Everett's "New Ideas 
of Population," namely, that every individual added to the popula- 
tion is a producer in excess of the amount that he consumes, and 
that each addition is, therefore, a gain, rather than a loss, to 
society, Dr. Cooper refutes the contention by appeal to his doc- 
trine of a fund destined for the payment of the wages of labor. 
Only a limited amount of capital is available at any given time for 
the payment of wages. If the number of laborers is increased, 
wages fall, distress ensues, and the number is reduced, "Popula- 
tion may encrease momentarily, but it will be starved out of exist- 

29 "Lectures," p. 213. 



"Lectures," p. 215. 



^ Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 21 

ence without a permanent and adequate demand to support it. 
That demand is the offspring of capital." ^^ 

Like Adam Smith, Dr. Cooper would qualify the application y 
of the doctrine of natural liberty to education and to banking. In 
these lines he would invoke the regulating authority of the State. 
In his views in regard to systems of instruction he stamps himself 
as a pioneer in the advocacy of universal education of the more 
practical kind. "It is not sufficient that a knowledge of elementary 
science should be diffused among every class of the people; they 
should know also, if time admit, the elementary truths of politics, 
political economy, and ethics." " Like Fawcett, however, propo- 
sals for free education aroused Dr. Cooper's opposition, on ac- 
count of the tendency of such activities on the part of the State to k 
weaken the individual sense of responsibility and thereby discour- 
age individual effort. 

An attempt to summarize the conclusions reached by Dr. 
Cooper, and to evaluate his work in comparison with that of his 
predecessors and contemporaries reveals important departures on 
his part from the beaten track of classical theorizing. Several of 
these points deserve notice: 

I. Dr. Cooper freed himself from the constant reference of ^ 
economic phenomena to an ethical norm, which colors the work of 
Adam Smith. While the latter was an ardent disciple of the doc- 
trine of natural liberty on the political side, his trend of mind and 
all the influence of his early training tended to prevent his un- 
qualified acceptance of the same principle in the ethical realm. 
Smith's passion for freedom had its basis, perhaps, in a reaction 
against the restrictive influences of mercantilism. More impor- 
tant, however, was the influence of the Physiocrats. A third fac- 
tor was furnished by his moral and theological opinions. The 
leading conviction expressed in his 'Theory of Moral Sentiments," 
published in 1759, is that of the benevolent government of the 
world through divine Providence. Hence he maintained that the 
individual, if unrestricted in his activities, would be "led by an 
invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his inten- 
tion." 

The philosophical basis of Dr. Cooper's view was more nearly 
that of the Enlightenment. For him the doctrine of natural lib- 
erty was stripped of the ethical and theological connotation which ^ 
it held for Smith. Economic phenomena are judged by economic 
laws alone. 

II. Largely, perhaps, on account of the influence of his en- 
vironment, Dr. Cooper emancipated himself less completely than 

31 "Lecturea," p. 240. 



32 Ibid., p. 265. 



22 Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 

did his contemporaries from the Physiocratic emphasis upon agri- 
culture as the source par excellence of wealth. His view is colored 
throughout by the ever-present idea of the tendency of manufac- 
turers to monopolistic measures, and their disposition to resort to 
the unwarranted interference of government in their behalf. The 
same thought appears in his discussion of the danger of inter- 
national quarrels arising as a consequence of competition for mar- 
kets for manufactured goods in foreign fields. He appears to re- 
gard as most nearly perfect that economic organization which ren- 
ders a nation in the greatest possible degree sufficient unto itself. 

III. The position of Dr. Cooper in the history of American 
economic thought is unique, moreover, in the fact that he may be 
considered as a national economist of the Southern industrial sys- 
tem. "Nationalism," in economic theory, is a vague and some- 
times misleading term. In its general acceptation, it has reference 
to the doctrines of a group of theorists of the early part of the 
nineteenth century who criticised the classicists on the score of 
perpetualism and cosmopolitanism, and, in the main, condemned 
the abstract method of economic inquiry. In general they favored 
protection of home industries as a means of increasing national 
strength and fostering national spirit. National power being the 
fundamental consideration, the organic conception of the State was 
emphasized. 

In a broader meaning of the term, however, it is equally true 
that Adam Smith was a national economist of his age and country. 
Perpetualism and cosmopolitanism he had received as a part of his 
legacy from the Physiocrats. He lived at a time when English 
industry was just passing from the handicraft into the manufac- 
turing stage. While the restrictions and regulations of the Middle 
Ages were passing away, they remained in force to a degree suffi- 
cient to furnish annoying and detrimental hindrances to the grow- 
ing industrial activities in may lines. The paramount need of the 
age, then, was for freedom. "It has been said — not perhaps with- 
out exaggeration — that this was the 'first and last word of his 
political and industrial philosophy' ; and it is true that 'every page 
of his 'writings is illumined' by the 'passion for freedom'." ^^ 

As Smith's "Wealth of Nations" represented a theoretical re- 
sponse to the economic needs of his age and country, so does Dr. 
Cooper's work represent a national economy of the industrial sys- 
tem of the ante-bellum South. Here may be found the basis of 
his favor for agriculture, of his advocacy of freedom of trade, of 
his opposition to manufactures when undertaken upon a scale so 
great as to render aggressive activity in competition for foreign 
markets a sine qua non of industrial progress. A similar tendency 
may also be traced in the views of Cardozo, whose work has been 

33 Price, "Political Economy in England," pp. 7-8. 



Dr. Thomas Cooper, Economist 



noticed already. Both Cooper's "Lectures" and Cardozo's "Notes" 
were published in 1826, antedating by one year the publication of 
the pamphlet entitled "Outlines of American Political Economy," 
by Friedrich List, who had, moreover, merely transferred his activ- 
ities to America as a condition of his release from a Wurtemberg 
prison.^* Henry C. Carey's first economic treatise, the "Essay on 
the Rate of Wages, Avith an Examination of the Causes of the 
Difference in the Condition of the Labouring Population through- 
out the World," was not published until 1885, and his "Principles 
of Political Economy" appeared between 1837 and 1840. 

While the ultimate consequences of some of Dr. Cooper's doc- 
trines cannot be considered as conducive to a considerable degree 
of industrial development, they should not lead us to lose sight of 
his services and his position as a pioneer in economic thought in 
the South, and, indeed, in America as a whole. We have seen that 
he was not a mere popularizer of the thought of his predecessors, 
but a theorist of originality and independence, his work fully justi- 
fying the estimate of McCulloch when he says that "though not 
written in a very philosophical spirit, it is the best of the American 
works on political economy that we have met with." '^ 

By virtue of his attainments in multifarious fields of endeavor, 
Dr. Cooper was a personage of great influence in the determination 
of the policies of South Carolina and the Southern States in gen- 
eral. An insight into the commanding position which he occupied 
among his contemporaries is afforded by a delightful sketch of 
literary society in Columbia in 1825, written many years later by 
Dr. William Campbell Preston. Dr. Cooper is described as "that 
very remarkable man," . . . "replete with all kinds of knowl- 
edge, a living encyclopaedia, — 'Multiun ille et tcrris jactatus et 
alto' — good-tempered, joyous, and of a kindly disposition." 

The effects of his published works dealing with economic ques- 
tions, and his lectures delivered in connection with his professor- 
ship in South Carolina College, are difficult to over-estimate. 
Reaching, as they did, young men who were destined to assume 
positions of leadership, their share in crystallizing opposition to 
the interference of the national government in State affairs, a pro- 
tective tariff, and, in short, to any regulation which could be left 
to the action of competition, was immense. 

But Dr. Cooper's direct influence may be traced in a circle far 
wider than that with which he came in contact as a professor, or 
as a writer. Energetic denunciation of the measures which he 
opposed characterized his popular addresses, and their mention is 

3* This pamphlet comprised a series of articles which had already been 
published in the Reading "National Zeitung." 



l^ 



35 Quoted by Dunbar, C. F„ "North American Review," Jan., 1876, p. 135. 



24 Dr. Thomas Co oper, Economist 

not beside the question at this point, in view of the similarity of the 
thought in many cases to the principles enunciated in the "Lec- 
tures." Violent denunciation of the protective system was a feature 
of an address which he delivered at a meeting held at Columbia on 
July 2, 1827, in opposition especially to the call for a convention 
at Harrisburg by the Society for the Promotion of Manufactures 
and the Mechanic Arts.^® 

In the agitation leading up to the Nullification act, Dr. Cooper 
applied the laissez-faire doctrines which he had laid down in his 
^ treatise in an article in the Columbia "Telescope" for March 19, 
1830: 

"The modern maxim of the worshipers of the union is that 
the will of the majority is the law paramount in every possible 
case of legislation. Thus the general welfare is the only rule of 
constitutional construction. Hence the tariff for protection. Hence 
the wanton waste of the public treasure in what is called internal 
improvements. Under this maxim that the will of the majority 
may decide what shall be the general welfare, there is an end of 
the federal compact This union is fraught with mis- 
chiefs which the South, and South Carolina in particular, will do 
well to calculate before she submits to them." ^' 

The thought here is strikingly similar to that of the sections 
already quoted in which the evils of a protective tariff are devel- 
oped and emphasized. These mistakes of governmental policy, as 
he conceived them to be, were opposed by Dr, Cooper with an 
earnestness that led at times of stress to acrimonious expression. 
His opposition, however, was not that of the revolutionist or the 
'^ demagogue, but had its basis in the conviction that he was oppos- 
ing the incontrovertible tenets of political economy to a narrow 
and selfish political policy, conceived and maintained in the interest 
of another section, and operating as a perpetual handicap to South- 
ern industry. 



28 McMaster, "History of the People of the United States," Vol. V, pp. 

247-249. 



^'' Quoted by McMaster. Cf. also Turner, "The Rise of the New West/ 
p. 322, and Bassett, "The Federalist System," pp. 256, 261-263. 



